News
SpaceX’s orbital Starship launch debut may be pushed to 2022 by slow FAA reviews
In a rare sign of material progress, SpaceX and the FAA have finally released what is known as a draft environmental assessment (EA) of the company’s South Texas Starship launch plans.
Set to be the largest and most powerful rocket in spaceflight history when it first begins orbital launches, the process of acquiring permission to launch Starship and its Super Heavy booster out of the wetlands of the South Texas coast was never going to be easy. The Boca Chica site SpaceX ultimately settled on for its first private launch facilities – initially meant for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy but later dedicated to BFR (now Starship) – is simultaneously surrounded by sensitive coastal habitats populated by several threatened or endangered species and situated mere miles as the crow flies from a city whose temporary population oscillates from a few thousand to tens of thousands.
Reception and analysis of the draft and its timing have been mixed. On one hand, SpaceX’s draft EA – completed with oversight from the FAA and help from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) – gives a number of reasons for optimism. In a sign that SpaceX is taking a pragmatic approach to the inevitable environmental review and launch license approval hurdles standing in front of orbital South Texas Starship launches, the company has actually pursued what is known as a “programmatic environmental assessment” (PEA).
Most importantly, that means that SpaceX’s Starbase PEA – if approved – will be more like a foundation or stepping stone that should make it easier to start small and methodically expand the scope and nature of the company’s plans for Boca Chica. Along those lines, as part of Starbase’s first dedicated environmental assessment, SpaceX has proposed a maximum of 23 flight operations annually while Starship is still in the development phase, including up to 20 suborbital Starship test flights and 3 orbital launches (or Super Heavy hops). Once SpaceX has worked out enough kinks for slightly more confident Starship operations, the company would enter an “operational phase” that would allow for as many as five suborbital Starship launches and five orbital Starship launches, as well as ship and booster landings back on land after all 10 possible launches.
In other words, SpaceX’s initial draft PEA is extremely conservative, requesting permission for what amounts to a bare minimum concept of operations for orbital Starship launches. At a maximum of 3-5 orbital launches per year, a PEA and subsequent launch license approved as-is would likely give SpaceX just enough slack to perform basic Earth orbit launches and no more than one or two orbital refilling tests per year. However, as an example, a five-launch maximum would almost entirely prevent SpaceX from launching Starship to Mars, the Moon, and maybe even high-energy Earth orbits without using all of its annual launch allotments on a single mission.
Perhaps most importantly, the draft PEA as proposed would unequivocally prevent SpaceX from performing the NASA Human Lander System (HLS) Moon landings it received an almost $3 billion contract to complete. Each HLS Starship Moon landing is expected to require anywhere from 10-16 launches to deliver a depot ship, HLS lander, and ~1200 tons of propellant to orbit. However, in terms of SpaceX’s prospects of developing Starship as quickly as possible, that’s actually a good thing. Above all else, SpaceX’s slimmed-down draft PEA should be far easier for the FAA to approve than a PEA pursuing permission for Starship’s ultimate ambitions – dozens to hundreds of launches annually – from the beginning. In theory, with this barebones PEA approved, SpaceX would then be able to build off the foundation with additional environmental assessments – like, for example, of expanding Starship’s maximum launch cadence.
Of course, SpaceX first needs the FAA turn this first draft PEA into a favorable environmental assessment (not a guarantee) before any of the above starts to matter. Based on the content of the draft itself and associated appendixes, SpaceX appears to have a decent shot at receiving a “finding of no significant impact (FONSI)” or “mitigated FONSI” determination. However, SpaceX began the process of creating that draft as far back as mid-2020, followed by an FAA announcement in November 2020. The implication is that the FAA managed to drag out a draft release process that some have estimated should have taken 3-4 months into an arduous 10-15 month ordeal.
Combined with the uphill battle it’s starting to look like SpaceX will have to wage for an orbital Starship launch license in South Texas, it’s looking increasingly likely that Starship, Super Heavy, and Starbase will be technically ready for orbital launch tests well before the FAA is ready to approve or license them. Barring delays, the public now has until mid-October to read and comment on SpaceX’s draft PEA, after which the FAA and SpaceX will review those comments and hopefully turn the draft into a completed review. Even if the FAA were to somehow take just two months to return a best-case FONSI, clearing Starbase of environmental launch hurdles, it’s hard to imagine that the agency could then turn around and approve an orbital Starship launch license – or even a one-off experimental permit – in the last few weeks of 2021.
Ultimately, that means that nothing short of a minor miracle is likely to prevent the FAA’s environmental review and licensing delays from directly delaying Starship’s orbital launch debut. There is at least a chance that Starship, Super Heavy, and Starbase’s orbital launch site wont be ready for orbital launches by the end of the year, but it’s increasingly difficult to imagine that all three won’t be proof tested, qualified, and ready for action just a month or two from now. For the time being, we’ll just have to wait and see where the cards fall.
News
Tesla leases new 108k-sq ft R&D facility near Fremont Factory
The lease adds to Tesla’s presence near its primary California manufacturing hub as the company continues investing in autonomy and artificial intelligence.
Tesla has expanded its footprint near its Fremont Factory by leasing a 108,000-square-foot R&D facility in the East Bay.
The lease adds to Tesla’s presence near its primary California manufacturing hub as the company continues investing in autonomy and artificial intelligence.
A new Fremont lease
Tesla will occupy the entire building at 45401 Research Ave. in Fremont, as per real estate services firm Colliers. The transaction stands as the second-largest R&D lease of the fourth quarter, trailing only a roughly 115,000-square-foot transaction by Figure AI in San Jose.
As noted in a Silicon Valley Business Journal report, Tesla’s new Fremont lease was completed with landlord Lincoln Property Co., which owns the facility. Colliers stated that Tesla’s Fremont expansion reflects continued demand from established technology companies that are seeking space for engineering, testing, and specialized manufacturing.
Tesla has not disclosed which of its business units will be occupying the building, though Colliers has described the property as suitable for office and R&D functions. Tesla has not issued a comment about its new Fremont lease as of writing.
AI investments
Silicon Valley remains a key region for automakers as vehicles increasingly rely on software, artificial intelligence, and advanced electronics. Erin Keating, senior director of economics and industry insights at Cox Automotive, has stated that Tesla is among the most aggressive auto companies when it comes to software-driven vehicle development.
Other automakers have also expanded their presence in the area. Rivian operates an autonomy and core technology hub in Palo Alto, while GM maintains an AI center of excellence in Mountain View. Toyota is also relocating its software and autonomy unit to a newly upgraded property in Santa Clara.
Despite these expansions, Colliers has noted that Silicon Valley posted nearly 444,000 square feet of net occupancy losses in Q4 2025, pushing overall vacancy to 11.2%.
In Pennsylvania, we got between 10 and 12 inches of snow over the weekend as a nasty Winter storm ripped through a large portion of the country, bringing snow to some areas and nasty ice storms to others.
I have had a Model Y Performance for the week courtesy of Tesla, which got the car to me last Monday. Today was my last full day with it before I take it back to my local showroom, and with all the accumulation on it, I decided to run a cool little experiment: How long would it take for Tesla’s Defrost feature to melt 8 inches of snow?
Tesla’s Defrost feature is one of the best and most underrated that the car has in its arsenal. While every car out there has a defrost setting, Tesla’s can be activated through the Smartphone App and is one of the better-performing systems in my opinion.
It has come in handy a lot through the Fall and Winter, helping clear up my windshield more efficiently while also clearing up more of the front glass than other cars I’ve owned.
The test was simple: don’t touch any of the ice or snow with my ice scraper, and let the car do all the work, no matter how long it took. Of course, it would be quicker to just clear the ice off manually, but I really wanted to see how long it would take.
Tesla Model Y heat pump takes on Model S resistive heating in defrosting showdown
Observations
I started this test at around 10:30 a.m. It was still pretty cloudy and cold out, and I knew the latter portion of the test would get some help from the Sun as it was expected to come out around noon, maybe a little bit after.
I cranked it up and set my iPhone up on a tripod, and activated the Time Lapse feature in the Camera settings.
The rest of the test was sitting and waiting.
It didn’t take long to see some difference. In fact, by the 20-minute mark, there was some notable melting of snow and ice along the sides of the windshield near the A Pillar.
However, this test was not one that was “efficient” in any manner; it took about three hours and 40 minutes to get the snow to a point where I would feel comfortable driving out in public. In no way would I do this normally; I simply wanted to see how it would do with a massive accumulation of snow.
It did well, but in the future, I’ll stick to clearing it off manually and using the Defrost setting for clearing up some ice before the gym in the morning.
Check out the video of the test below:
❄️ How long will it take for the Tesla Model Y Performance to defrost and melt ONE FOOT of snow after a blizzard?
Let’s find out: pic.twitter.com/Zmfeveap1x
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 26, 2026
Tesla Robotaxi ride-hailing without a Safety Monitor is proving to be a difficult task, according to some riders who made the journey to Austin to attempt to ride in one of its vehicles that has zero supervision.
Last week, Tesla officially removed Safety Monitors from some — not all — of its Robotaxi vehicles in Austin, Texas, answering skeptics who said the vehicles still needed supervision to operate safely and efficiently.
BREAKING: Tesla launches public Robotaxi rides in Austin with no Safety Monitor
Tesla aimed to remove Safety Monitors before the end of 2025, and it did, but only to company employees. It made the move last week to open the rides to the public, just a couple of weeks late to its original goal, but the accomplishment was impressive, nonetheless.
However, the small number of Robotaxis that are operating without Safety Monitors has proven difficult to hail for a ride. David Moss, who has gained notoriety recently as the person who has traveled over 10,000 miles in his Tesla on Full Self-Driving v14 without any interventions, made it to Austin last week.
He has tried to get a ride in a Safety Monitor-less Robotaxi for the better part of four days, and after 38 attempts, he still has yet to grab one:
Wow just wow!
It’s 8:30PM, 29° out ice storm hailing & Tesla Robotaxi service has turned back on!
Waymo is offline & vast majority of humans are home in the storm
Ride 38 was still supervised but by far most impressive yet pic.twitter.com/1aUnJkcYm8
— David Moss (@DavidMoss) January 25, 2026
Tesla said last week that it was rolling out a controlled test of the Safety Monitor-less Robotaxis. Ashok Elluswamy, who heads the AI program at Tesla, confirmed that the company was “starting with a few unsupervised vehicles mixed in with the broader Robotaxi fleet with Safety Monitors,” and that “the ratio will increase over time.”
This is a good strategy that prioritizes safety and keeps the company’s controlled rollout at the forefront of the Robotaxi rollout.
However, it will be interesting to see how quickly the company can scale these completely monitor-less rides. It has proven to be extremely difficult to get one, but that is understandable considering only a handful of the cars in the entire Austin fleet are operating with no supervision within the vehicle.
Tesla leases new 108k-sq ft R&D facility near Fremont Factory
Tesla winter weather test: How long does it take to melt 8 inches of snow?
